Scientific Consensus In Doubt

Two Stanford geologists are disputing the decade-old explanation of the large amount of coal accumulated during the Carboniferous Period. Associate Professor Kevin Boyce and Postdoctorate Research Fellow Matthew Nelsen collaborated with scientists across the country to release a paper this past month in which they propose a new understanding of coal development. According to Nelson, discontent with the evolutionary lag hypothesis has been around for some time before the publishing of this recent paper. This raises the larger issue: If geologists had seen problems with the hypothesis, why had nothing been done to disprove it earlier? –Aulden Foltz, The Stanford Daily, 2 February 2016

Fears that some of Australia’s most important climate research institutions will be gutted under a Turnbull government have been realised with deep job cuts for scientists. Total job cuts would be about 350 staff over two years, the CSIRO confirmed in an email to staff, with the Data61 and Manufacturing divisions also hit. “Climate will be all gone, basically,” one senior scientist said before the announcement. In the email sent out to staff on Thursday morning, CSIRO’s chief executive Larry Marshall indicated that, since climate change had been established, further work in the area would be a reduced priority. –Peter Hannam, The Sydney Morning Herald, 4 February 2016

Sceptics have often pointed out that if the science of global warming is “settled” then it’s clearly not necessary to spend a fortune researching it. The government down under now seems to have taken this message on, announcing that jobs in the ocean/atmosphere divisions at CSIRO are to be slashed. Their reasoning could have come straight from the pages of this blog: In the email sent out to staff on Thursday morning, CSIRO’s chief executive Larry Marshall indicated that, since climate change had been established, further work in the area would be a reduced priority. It was Lord May who said to Roger Harrabin “I’m the President of the Royal Society and I’m telling you that the science is settled”. I wonder if he is reconsidering the wisdom of those remarks. –Andrew Montford, Bishop Hill, 4 February 2016

Scientists in Germany have switched on a nuclear fusion experiment that they hope will provide a solution to finding clean and safe nuclear power. A small amount of hydrogen was released into the device by German chancellor Angela Merkel as she launched the device at the Max Planck Institute in Greifswald. The device itself won’t generate energy, but will be used to test technology that could hold plasma into place in nuclear reactors. The technology is considered to be several decades away, but proponents argue that it could be a viable replacement for fossil fuels and nuclear fission reactors. –Emily Reynolds, Wired 3 February 2016

SSE has announced plans to shut most of its Fiddler’s Ferry coal-fired power plant in April, wiping 1.5 gigawatts of power capacity from the UK grid and worsening the looming energy crisis next winter. UK energy supplies were already forecast to fall to dangerously low levels next winter due to the closure of several other old plants. Emergency measures have been brought in to bolster supplies after official analysis suggested there could be zero spare capacity in the market, and insufficient power to keep the lights on on a windless day. John Musk, analyst at RBC Capital Markets, warned UK margins would now be “critically tight for next winter” and forecast this would lead to “extremely volatile” spot power prices. –Emily Gosden, The Daily Telegraph, 4 February 2016

British households will not benefit from a fall in market electricity prices because their suppliers are facing rising costs elsewhere, such as green energy subsidies, which they say cancel out any wholesale price falls. Electricity and gas prices traded on the open market have fallen 20-35 percent in recent months as milder-than-normal weather has curbed demand and falling commodity prices have added even more downward pressure. Cornwall Energy data showed the costs of government policies, which also include discounts for low-income households and payments for energy efficiency measures, on energy suppliers have risen to the highest level ever. This means non-energy costs now make up as much as 60 percent of the average British electricity bill, up from 45 percent four years ago, according to Cornwall Energy data. –Karolin Schaps and Susanna Twidale, Reuters, 1 February 2016

How quickly things can change. Once the darlings of the auto industry, recent auto show debuts and previews of high-mileage hybrid and plug-in electric cars are being met with a collective yawn in the wake of cheap (and getting cheaper) gasoline. Green car sales were down by around 16 percent last year and can be expected to drop even further through 2016 unless fuel prices suddenly soar. Expect to see casualties among some of the niche players in what could come to be an incredibly shrinking car segment, California-mandated models not withstanding. –Jim Gorzelany, Forbes, 2 February 2016

Related

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (4)

David Lewis

I am referring to the portion of this article telling about “Australia’s most important climate research institutions will be gutted” because “science of global warming is settled.”

It has been obvious that one of the many hidden agendas of the anthropological climate change movement has been to keep the researchers employed. I don’t have the figures but it is certain that the number of jobs in this area has skyrocketed since this fraud was created. To keep the issue alive and to keep their jobs these researchers are motivated to come up with one scary conclusion after another.

However, in claiming that the “Science is Settled” they have shot themselves in the foot, at least in Australia. Perhaps they should have come to some conclusions casting some doubt on anthropological climate change so more research would be needed to clarify it.

Coming up with scary conclusions to keep their jobs is not that different from what has been done in the past. In the 1970’s one of my professors told me that it wasn’t unusual for a scientist to publish a paper with the obvious goal of getting more money for his research.

Amber

Right you are David Lewis . The short sighted scientists that facilitated the scam are no longer useful or necessary .

Governments and the bankers won’t want lose ends like scientists around to pop their warming hot air balloon . If they aren’t let go some other grant provided distraction will be concocted to payoff the ring leaders and shut them up so the science doesn’t get unsettled .

If they can just fudge the temperature numbers to match the agenda who needs scientists anyway ?

Mike Cross

All please note that Michael Mann is getting involved with those scientists who are predicting an imminent iceage and supporting a website about that issue… this swing will become more obvious as the rats leave the sinking ship of AGW/climate change

Aido

It gets even more dodgy. The ‘anomalies’ are differences from a 30-year average, referred to as the ‘norm’.. 1930-1960, then 1960-1990, which is the current ‘norm’. If you took 1940-1970, or 1950-1980 as the ‘norm’, you’d get different figures. How anyone falls for this beats me.

Amber

Ricky C
About 60 million voters would likely agree with you . Some people like to rescue pit bulls to because they figure they can “fix ‘ them .
Donald Trump doesn’t need one of his top enemies buttering up his daughter
to help sell a scary global warming scam .
Gore , Podesta , and Steyer are the best of pals and would love nothing more than to have a direct pipeline into Trump to help bring him down . Stating the obvious ,
they mean him absolutely no good and will do every thing they can to wreck his Presidency one way or the other .
Lets hope Ivanka dedicates her influence and smarts to help real people and solve real problems .
Stein got 1 % of the vote for a reason . The global warming con game is over .

amirlach

Ricky C

She better not. Just like its said, everyone worked very hard, myself particularly to get the waste out of the “Climate Change” feeding trough for consultants who do nothing for the economy. If I want to make sure my medical supplies at a local hospital in third world countries that I visit are modern and effective, their economy has to be booming, not cut down by giving money to international Climate Change hustlers.

JayPee

Dale

I don’t know whether or not Tim Ball actually made the above posting but if so, it’s in very poor taste and severely weakens his potential as a climate authority. Spamming web sites (I’ve seen this several times before on other sites) is not the way to gather interest or respect. People usually ignore such spam and laugh it off as just another fly-by-night.
I’ve read many of Tim Ball’s articles and have heard him speak via video. He has too much to offer to stoop to this low level nonsense, if this posting is indeed from Tim Ball.